Introduction: In clinical practice AP pelvis standard protocols are suitable for average size patients. However, as the average body size has increased over the past decades, radiographers have had to improve their practice in order to ensure that adequate image quality with minimal radiation dose to the patient is achieved. Gonad shielding has been found to be an effective way to reduce the radiation dose to the ovaries. However, the effect of increased body size, or fat thickness, in combination with gonad shielding is unclear. The goal of the study was to investigate the impact of gonad shielding in a phantom of adult female stature with increasing fat thicknesses on SNR (as a measure for image quality) and dose for AP pelvis examination. Methods: An adult Alderson female pelvis phantom was imaged with a variety of fat thickness categories as a representation of increasing BMI. 72 images were acquired using both AEC and manual exposure with and without gonad shielding. The radiation dose to the ovaries was measured using a MOSFET system. The relationship between fat thickness, SNR and dose when the AP pelvis was performed with and without shielding was investigated using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. P-values < 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. Results: Ovary dose and SNR remained constant despite the use of gonad shielding while introducing fat layers. Conclusion: The ovary dose did not increase with an increase of fat thickness and the image quality was not altered. Implications for practice: Based on this phantom study it can be suggested that obese patients can expect the same image quality as average patients while respecting ALARA principle when using adequate protocols.
The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the impact of an amputation and of phantom pain on the subjective well-being of amputees. Sixteen lower-limb amputees were interviewed. A semi-structured interview and two Visual Analogue Scales were used. To interpret the results, a new socio-medical model joining two models, 'The Disablement Process model' and the 'Social Production Function theory', was used. Questions were asked concerning the factors influencing patients' subjective well-being prior to, at the time of and after an amputation. These factors were patients' medical history, their phantom sensations and phantom pain, their daily activities, the social support they received, and the influence of an amputation and phantom pain on long-term behaviour and on their subjective well-being. All factors were found to have an influence on the individual's subjective well-being. All these factors, however, seemed to reinforce each other. Therefore, the greatest influence of factors on subjective well-being occurred when more than one factor was involved. Substituting certain activities by others then becomes less and less effective in inducing a sense of subjective well-being.
Objective: To evaluate the delivery, acceptance and experiences regarding a traditional and teletreatment approach to mirror therapy as delivered in a randomized controlled trial. Design: Mixed methods, prospective study. Setting: Rehabilitation centres, hospital and private practices. Subjects: Adult patients with phantom pain following lower limb amputation and their treating physical and occupational therapists. Interventions: All patients received 4 weeks of traditional mirror therapy (n=51), followed by 6 weeks of teletreatment (n=26) or 6 weeks of self-delivered mirror therapy (n=25). Main measures: Patient files, therapist logs, log files teletreatment, acceptance questionnaire and interviews with patients and their therapists. Results: In all, 51 patients and 10 therapists participated in the process evaluation. Only 16 patients (31%) received traditional mirror therapy according to the clinical framework during the first 4 weeks. Between weeks 5 and 10, the teletreatment was used by 14 patients (56%) with sufficient dose. Teletreatment usage decreased from a median number of 31 (weeks 5–10) to 19 sessions (weeks 11–24). Satisfactory teletreatment user acceptance rates were found with patients demonstrating higher scores (e.g. regarding the usefulness to control pain) than therapists. Potential barriers for implementation of the teletreatment perceived by patients and therapists were related to insufficient training and support as well as the frequency of technical problems. Conclusion: Traditional mirror therapy and the teletreatment were not delivered as intended in the majority of patients. Implementation of the teletreatment in daily routines was challenging, and more research is needed to evaluate user characteristics that influence adherence and how technology features can be optimized to develop tailored implementation strategies.
